Editor:

If you are a grandparent living on Cape Cod, you welcome the summer to enjoy your children and grandchildren; yet our children and grandchildren face a demographic crisis. Birth rates remain below replacement levels and the long-term consequences are absent. 

The reality results in slower economic growth, a reduced work force and rising costs for Social Security and Medicare. This compromises the future and will seriously pressure communities which depend on stable families.

This is not a cultural disaster; it is a policy failure. The cause is the tax code and a benefit system which treats marriage and childbearing as a second-rate career or worse. Families face marriage penalties and discrimination in the tax code and parents suffer the impossible costs for housing, childcare and necessities. Our public policy is fractured and it offers inadequate relief.

To reverse this free-falling decline, we must first reform the tax code. Marriage need not be penalized; child-related tax credits should be restored and enlarged — fully refundable and administratively simpler to access for working families. Child care credits and dependent care costs should be addressed through stronger credits and incentives for employers. 

If we value our children and our grandchildren, within a stable community, we must reform the tax code so our grandchildren’s children will be here to enjoy the summers of Cape Cod to be.

Mark I. Berson
Orleans

Editor:

Our concerns are the intersection of Route 137 and Old Queen Anne Roads with the increase in traffic.

1) At the red flashing light, eight lanes merge into one intersection, four turning left or continuing straight and four turning right. The red flashing light vs. a timed traffic light leaves the decisions up to four or more drivers to determine who's next, simultaneously. Assuming everyone makes the correct or fair decision. One driver who is late for work, one who is on vacation mode and not familiar with "four corners" or one who thinks "me, more than we," can mess up the mechanics too readily. (Raise your hand for each time you've seen someone steam through without stopping at all.)

2) There’s only one sign warning a four-way stop approaching on Route 137 heading south. The other roads have none. 

3) Many afternoons, traffic backs up from the intersection to Chipping Stone Road, 0.7 miles away.

4) Trucks heading west on Old Queen Anne rarely slow down at the 30 mph sign at Old Queen bearing right merging into Training Field Rd. The changes in traffic patterns are notable since the addition of the two newest rotaries on Route 28.

Sunday, July 5 at the intersection were three officers with cruisers and blue lights on. No sign of an accident but perhaps post holiday supervision? Those of us living nearby use this intersection several times a day, it seems more dangerous each year, not just during holidays or at peak season. The new signs and red blinking light help, but don't lessen the risks enough. 

A. Cronin, G. Dress, K. Barwise, T. Cunniff
Chatham

Editor:

Though I only visit Chatham occasionally now, I agree with Debbie Aikman (“Safe Sidewalk Solution Needed,” July 22) that something must be done to protect pedestrians on Stage Harbor Road. Pedestrians should also be protected on Bridge Street and other town roads without sidewalks that carry heavy pedestrian traffic.

The unfortunate settlement of the lawsuit brought by Stage Harbor Road residents derailed the town meeting–approved sidewalk project and went too far by effectively precluding sidewalks there indefinitely. That settlement also allowed residents to continue obstructing off-road pedestrian travel with fences, mailboxes, shrubs, hedges and other plantings, effectively ending our efforts to improve pedestrian safety on Stage Harbor Road and Bridge Street.

Ms. Aikman asks, “Can homeowners whose plantings have encroached onto roadside town property be compelled to move them onto their property?” The answer is yes — assuming town officials have the will to enforce the law.

The solution already exists in General Bylaw § 208-16, “Roadside Obstructions,” which provides that “to preserve and promote the safety of the public” restrictions apply to “structures, fences, shrubs, hedges and other plantings” along town roads. More importantly, the bylaw states:

 “Any roadside obstruction placed within or along a town road layout…that prevents or impedes…pedestrian passage shall be prohibited.” It further requires that such obstructions be removed immediately upon request of the department of public works or police department.

It is long past time for town officials to enforce this bylaw and restore safe passage for pedestrians.

George Myers
Venice, Fla.

Editor: 

I am responding to the letter written by Deborah Aikman on sidewalks in the July 23 Chronicle. Massachusetts state law passed three years ago requires motorists to allow at least four feet when overtaking a bicyclist or a pedestrian. Our narrow roads make this difficult especially with the influx of summer drivers (many unaware of the law) and pedestrians walking to area beaches (not even on the side of the road facing traffic), many hauling wagons and enough equipment to set up camp. The risk of accidents is great especially as the road signs citing the four feet allowance don’t include pedestrians, picturing only a bicycle. That is dangerously misleading and could cause an accident. 

The four feet was chosen as being adequate to establish culpability in civil lawsuits in cases of injury or death caused by a motorist failing to observe the law. A better solution for our narrow streets would be to create a bike and pedestrian pathway along our roads. Apparently, the town already has the right to create such a lane under state law, but residents object to any intrusion into walls, gardens and trees they have illegally put in the town’s set back. It’s difficult to find a compromise that satisfies everyone, but the safety of children and adult pedestrians should come first. Will it take a serious accident to bring change?

John Sweeney
South Chatham

Editor:

Congratulations to AmeriCorps Cape Cod (ACC) on receiving $1.5 million in federal funding this month by winning a competitive three-year grant. ACC has helped Friends of Trees maintain Chase Park and Kate Gould Park with weeding, pruning, mulching and cleanup in recent years. We’re delighted to know the program can continue to serve Cape Cod communities by partnering with nonprofits such as ours, as well as municipalities, schools and other organizations through August 2029.

It's a well-deserved recognition for ACC’s hard work and dedication to protecting natural resources and meeting local needs. Bravo!

DeeDee Holt, president
Chatham Friends of Trees

Editor:

In his letter to The Chronicle July 23 (“Questions For County Candidates”), Eric Schwaab implies that as a county commissioner, I should have submitted my opinion on revisions to the Cape Cod Commission Regional Policy Plan before the plan was formally presented to the commissioners at the conclusion of the public comment period. In other words, I should have told the CCC what I wanted them to tell me.

The public, including Mr. Scwaab, must have confidence that revisions to the RPP will be shaped by their input and not dictated by those higher up in the organization chart. This isn’t Trump world.

I share residents’ concern about the rapid pace of building on the Cape and the need for a long-term assessment of the carrying capacity of our fragile peninsula, but any claim that the Cape Cod Commission through the RPP can serve as the ultimate tool to arrest development on Cape Cod is wildly off the mark. For instance, the commission is precluded by its enabling legislation from ruling on 40B projects, which are the major producer of large-scale housing developments cropping up all over the Cape.

There are three candidates for County Commissioner on the Sept. 1 Democratic primary ballot, but only one has the temperament and experience to meet the future challenges facing Cape Cod.

Ron Bergstrom
Chatham
The writer is a member of the Barnstable County Board of Commissioners.